Lonk Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Both players draw 3 cards. Just be thankful that they didn't print this card. It's a Spellbook card, so it's ridiculously searchable and re-usable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-kyo- Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 it's not a spellbook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ＳＯＮ ＧＯＫＵ Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 [Manga] Spellbook Inside the Pot ARE YOU BLIND? Also this would make OTK's easier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hyperion Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 it's not a spellbookIt has Spellbook in its name therefor its not a Spellbook card.Makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 [Manga] Spellbook Inside the Pot ARE YOU BLIND? Also this would make OTK's easier It has Spellbook in its name therefor its not a Spellbook card. Makes sense How about you two stop being figs for half a second and do some research before you tell people they're wrong. 魔導書 - Madōsho is Spellbook Spellbook inide the Pot - つぼのなかのまじゅつしょ - Tsubo no Naka no Majutsusho It is not a spellbook, but it is a GREED card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingdom Xathers Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Don't you guys know how to look up the Japanese names of this card and the actual "Spellbooks"? This card's Romanji name is Tsubo no Naka no Majutsusho, which does not have the Madōsho that the "Spellbook" Archetype has. Thus, NOT a true "Spellbook" Card. ... and thank you, Black, for ninja-ing me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Even if it was a Spellbook, it doesn't matter. It's broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synchronized Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I'm just curious here, if a card were to be printed like this, but instead: Your opponent draws 3 cards and if they do, you draw 2 cards. You can only activate 1 "Generic Draw Card Name" per turn. Would something like that be acceptable? Been tossing around the idea for a while and I'm curious if the fact that your opponent pluses far more significantly than you do on this makes it fair. I'm just curious here, if a card were to be printed like this, but instead: Your opponent draws 3 cards and if they do, you draw 2 cards. You can only activate 1 "Generic Draw Card Name" per turn. Would something like that be acceptable? Been tossing around the idea for a while and I'm curious if the fact that your opponent pluses far more significantly than you do on this makes it fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 That would be fine, as that is... an inherent.. -2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I'm just curious here, if a card were to be printed like this, but instead:Would something like that be acceptable? Been tossing around the idea for a while and I'm curious if the fact that your opponent pluses far more significantly than you do on this makes it fair.That would be fine, as that is... an inherent.. -2?And how does being a -2 inherently make it fair...?Decks that would use it are decks that would OTK and not give a damn that the opponent drew cards. Seems like a degenerate card that either falls on its face or works in degenerate decks that shouldn't exist anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ＳＯＮ ＧＯＫＵ Posted June 8, 2014 Report Share Posted June 8, 2014 Im not sure if everyone goes out of their way to look up the romanji names of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%phil Posted June 8, 2014 Report Share Posted June 8, 2014 drawing 3 (or even 2) cards then getting 600 more damage with secret barrel seems like a pretty nice way of doing things. it'll just make degenerate decks that only care about their own advantage (where it's basically a +2) such as exodia/chain burn better which is definitely not something that should be encouraged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 Im not sure if everyone goes out of their way to look up the romanji names of stuff. You do when it's name can actually break it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 You do when it's name can actually break it. I don't know what card you're looking at, but this card could be called "Trent" and would still be insanely broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I don't know what card you're looking at, but this card could be called "Trent" and would still be insanely broken. Ok, break it even worse than it actually is. Cuz you know, searchable draw 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.